Yeast

[MrC]

I have a couple of yeast questions so I thought I'd start a discussion dedicated to yeast.

I just got some American Ale Yeast (1056) delivered from Dunedin Malthouse. It arrived in a small bottle which was not what I was expecting (assumption is the mother of all F#$%ups). It appears to be unbranded and part of me is reluctant to spend 5 hours brewing and then risk a unknown yeast.

Does anyone have experience with these yeasts?
Would it be safer to buy some US05 and save the 1056 for an extract brew?
Are these great yeasts?
Any thoughts?

[denimglen]

Use US05. It's the same strain - it used to be called US56 but I think they changed the name to US05 because it was too similar to 1056.

I wouldn't use that liquid yeast (no offence to DM). Just that you don't know how it was grown, what conditions it was bottled in, if it is infected or not etc etc. Also if it was sent warm I'd be worried about the viability.

If you do want to use it make a starter with it (you should anyway, there probably isn''t enough to pitch into a batch). When the starter has fermented out pour off a little of the beer and taste it. If it doesn't smell/taste wierd or infected then it may be OK.

Personally I'd take the safe option and go US05.

[bj]

I would use the yeast from Dennis, i know first hand that hes very careful with sanitation when propogating it, and iv been using his liquid yeasts for the last 2 years and never had a bad one.
Im sure there are a few more brewers out thre that could atest to Dennis products.
The only problem i could imagine would be in posting it, but with the temps were having i doubt it has a chance to warm up.
IF your worried Id go with tasting the starter (which you def need to do with those little vials)
Anyway, hope the brew goes well either way.
Cheers

[Brendon]

The yeast may be perfectly fine but the issue I have is trading off the yeast as American Ale 1056.
It's clearly a rip of Wyeast American Ale 1056.
It is true that once these yeasts are in the public domain they can be on sold - there was a segment on the Brewing Network about it from the White brothers. The thing that can't be appropriated is the copyright that goes with the 1056 which is far too close to Wyeast in my opinion.

Personally I think this is pretty poor form. Sell it under another name but not under something so similar to the Wyeast product.
Even still you get what you pay for. Wyeast and Whitelabs put a lot of effort into getting their yeast to you viable and infection free. You need to weight up the quality of the yeast handling and viability before you use it. In my mind this also includes dry yeast not stored in fridges (viability degrades).
There was a thread on the old forum here re: this yeast.
http://www.realbeer.co.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8477&highlight=...

Brendon

[Dan]

Despite the legalities of of using the yeast, copyright etc do you really care anyway! this is NZ not the bloody US!
DMH uses 1 stage of propagation, Ive used his yeasts for quite a while although now I buy smackys, anyway Ive never had a problem that I can detect, put it in a good starter and a way it goes,
I won best in show last year using his bavarian lager yeast from those itty bitty bottles, one step starter, and got other medals with different yeasts, some admittedly I had stored in my fridge for months.
I,d far rather use that little bottle than a dry anyday but thats my opinion, Im currently using 1272 American ale yeast II, and Im liking the clean flavours its spitting out, after using 1968 for a couple of months and making some nice beers I,d grown tired of it, even though it was mint for quick ferments and clear bottlings, the 1272 is a nice refreshing change.

Ive used 1056 and it has produced some really nice Apa's, due to the floccing i,d recommend racking it to a secondary for a couple of weeks! In my opinion it makes a nice clean hoppy ale!

[Dan]

Mr Cherry! I,d run with the 1056 IMHO!
Deminglen pointed out that it is the same strain as us05, if so I think you'll find that the outcome differs considerably, and i,d definitely take the liquid variety for clean flavours, again, just my opinion! (I dont want to start a yeast war)
If you've got a spare fermentor handy, split the batch and pitch both yeasts, then decide for yourself which you prefer, you wouldnt need a big starter then 400 -750ml!

[Brendon]

Yes I do mind considering I have met and talked to Dave Logsdon a number of times and think he's a good guy who is very supportive of the New Zealand brewing community.
If I invested the amount of time and effort into my packaging that Wyeast and Whitelabs had and some one was trading on my hard effort I would be pissed off.

Like I said - call them something different.
For instance call it something like Chico Ale yeast and describe it's qualities. Call the Bavarian lager Weihenstephan lager yeast or Freising lager yeast and describe it's qualities.

That's my point.

B

[Stu McKinlay]

Morally:
I've gotten to know Dave Logsdon (of Wyeast) a little bit over the last couple of years as he has been head judge at BrewNZ. He's put in many years (and a lot of $) into building up an excellent yeast business. He's also judged at BrewNZ for virtually nothing. I think passing around yeast from brewer to brewer is fine but I don't think selling it is (especially under the Wyeast brand name).

Sanitationally:
I've tasted a couple of quite problematic beers made with the Dunedin Malthouse beer - you can never tell where the problem came from the store or the brewer. i advised both brewers to steer clear of it, just because "you gets what you pays for". What did you pay? You can get white labs shipped here from morebeer for about $20. I'd rather pay that little bit extra for the safety of yeast straight from the lab.

Liquid v dry:
We don't need to get into the dried v liquid debate anymore. A study conducted by fermentis (creators of "Saf" dried range) actually concluded that liquid is better. See: http://193.238.150.33/SHARED/Doc_52528.pdf
I'm probably looking at a Safale S04 v Wyeast Ringwood Ordinary Bitter in 6 weeks or so. It'll be my first dry v liquid yeast-off.
As for the results - in last year's national homebrew comp the "best in show" was a liquid yeast user and "brewer of the year" was a dried yeast user.

[jt]

I'd make a starter and check it smells and tastes ok. Buy a US-05 as a backup.

Weigh up the pro's and con's of the discusssions on morality above and choose your next liquid yeast from where-ever you'll get it freshest.

Considering the beauty of fresh yeast, cost will not be a big factor (as you can get great mileage out of a liquid anyway)

Cheers and good brewing, jt

[MrC]

Sheesh, I never thought I'd be facing a $8.50 moral yeast dilemma.

Thanks for your input guys, I've got both US05 and the "1056" so I'll make a starter and see what I think.

Not sure what I'll buy next time...

[MrC]

Just thought I'd give an update on my Coopers yeast brew. I made a good starter from three stubbies of Coopers pale ale and it tasted fine. I pitched it at 19oC and it's been fermenting for a week now. Bubbling has slowed but it's still going. There's a very strong smell of bananas coming from the airlock. Maybe the temp should have been lower? Lager temps maybe? If the beer tastes like the smell from the airlock lock, I may enter it into the fruit beer category as banana beer :)

Any tips on retaining yeast after a brew?
Would I be better off starting from the Coopers bottles again?

[denimglen]

I think that Cooper's ale yeast is supposed to ferment quite clean at high temperatures.

You might find the yeast will clean up after itself a little and those esters will be gone by drinking time.

Have a look at these threads on saving yeast -

Yeast Washing

Freezing Yeast

[MrC]

Thanks, great links. I'll follow the Yeast Washing technique and hopefully get a few more brews out of it. Here's a pic of the Coopers yeast starter just before pitching